Make no mistake about it, our offense lost us that game. We went three and out two or three times and hung the defense out to dry. If we would have had a good, not great but good Qb, we would have won that game.

I hope you are not refering the playoff game vs. the Saints.

_________________Just one Super Bowl win before I go!

June 12th, 2013, 3:11 am

TheRealWags

Megatron

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12534

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

PFT wrote:

Stafford says he’s playing for wins, not contractPosted by Darin Gantt on June 12, 2013, 8:01 AM EDT

Over the weekend, Lions president Tom Lewand said the team was working on a new contract for quarterback Matthew Stafford, hoping to get one done before the start of the season.

But after regressing last year, and watching the team fall to 4-12, Stafford said he wanted his focus to be on playing better.

“I don’t play this game to get contracts,” Stafford said, via Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press. “I play this game to win games and that’s the way I’ve always felt about it. Whether it gets done or it doesn’t, there would be no distractions.”

Last year there were plenty, as his numbers reflected the team’s own tailspin.

He went from 41 touchdowns and a 97.2 rating for a 10-win team to 20 touchdowns and a 79.8 rating for a four-win team.

That made the negativity hard to miss.

“It’s impossible not to hear it just because I watch SportsCenter like everybody else and I’m a person, too, but it’s not the main fuel” Stafford said. “The main fuel for me is I want to keep progressing in the right direction, I want to be a great quarterback and I want to be able to help this team win, and the only way I’m going to be able to do that is if I let nothing get in my way and just concentrate on what I’m supposed to concentrate on and get better at what I need to get better at.”

That kind of attitude is why the Lions are willing to hitch their financial futures to him.

“He’s evolved into a leader,” Lewand said. “Now when rookies walk into the locker room they see a quarterback who’s been here four years and they see a different guy who occupies a different spot on the team and a lot of that is because of his own efforts.

“I don’t think we have a guy on our roster who’s worked harder than he has, and I’m not sure that you’ll find a guy who cares more than he does about this team and about winning, and about his teammates.”

I think people put too much on Stafford for last season. He lost 3 of his top 4 WRs, didn't have a viable option from the backfield, and even lost like a half dozen TDs from CJ getting tackled at the one yard line. He regressed a bit, but he is also throwing more than anyone in the NFL and its going to be hard to stay consistent when the players around you aren't. He hasn't even got to his prime years yet and wont for another 2 years.

June 12th, 2013, 12:23 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

Killwill25 wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Make no mistake about it, our offense lost us that game. We went three and out two or three times and hung the defense out to dry. If we would have had a good, not great but good Qb, we would have won that game.

I hope you are not refering the playoff game vs. the Saints.

No, I'm referring to the other playoff game that our offense couldn't pick up a first down in three series...

June 12th, 2013, 4:02 pm

Killwill25

Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: March 5th, 2009, 8:42 pmPosts: 2422Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Killwill25 wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Make no mistake about it, our offense lost us that game. We went three and out two or three times and hung the defense out to dry. If we would have had a good, not great but good Qb, we would have won that game.

I hope you are not refering the playoff game vs. the Saints.

No, I'm referring to the other playoff game that our offense couldn't pick up a first down in three series...

the one in which we did not force a single punt the entire game? The same game in which we missed about 20 tackles? We ran for 32 yards but somehow managed 70% on 3rd down in that game. It's just strange that you would use that game against the QB.

The Saints went for it on 4th every time to avoid giving the ball back to our offense.

Are you really saying that we lost that game because there were 2 or 3 first downs we didn't pick up?

_________________Just one Super Bowl win before I go!

June 12th, 2013, 6:18 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

Killwill25 wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Killwill25 wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Make no mistake about it, our offense lost us that game. We went three and out two or three times and hung the defense out to dry. If we would have had a good, not great but good Qb, we would have won that game.

I hope you are not refering the playoff game vs. the Saints.

No, I'm referring to the other playoff game that our offense couldn't pick up a first down in three series...

the one in which we did not force a single punt the entire game? The same game in which we missed about 20 tackles? We ran for 32 yards but somehow managed 70% on 3rd down in that game. It's just strange that you would use that game against the QB.

The Saints went for it on 4th every time to avoid giving the ball back to our offense.

Are you really saying that we lost that game because there were 2 or 3 first downs we didn't pick up?

2 or three in a row, yes... And we failed to take advantage of 2 or 3 takeaways as well. It was demoralizing to the D and you could see that they were gassed going into 1/2 time. That's what killed the game, period.

NO wasn't "afraid of our O," they just knew that we couldn't stop a 4th and anything short. Why not go for it? You're playing against a gassed defense that can't stop anything.

2 or three in a row, yes... And we failed to take advantage of 2 or 3 takeaways as well. It was demoralizing to the D and you could see that they were gassed going into 1/2 time. That's what killed the game, period.

NO wasn't "afraid of our O," they just knew that we couldn't stop a 4th and anything short. Why not go for it? You're playing against a gassed defense that can't stop anything.

Seriously man, it's absurd to say only the offense lost that game. The fact that the defense didn't force a single punt is a huge factor. I'm not disagreeing that the offense played a role in losing the game (a major role), but to dismiss the defense (as you seem to be) is dishonest. Both sides played a role in that loss. To attribute it to one or the other is just, well, stupid.

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

June 13th, 2013, 1:30 am

wjb21ndtown

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

2 or three in a row, yes... And we failed to take advantage of 2 or 3 takeaways as well. It was demoralizing to the D and you could see that they were gassed going into 1/2 time. That's what killed the game, period.

NO wasn't "afraid of our O," they just knew that we couldn't stop a 4th and anything short. Why not go for it? You're playing against a gassed defense that can't stop anything.

Seriously man, it's absurd to say only the offense lost that game. The fact that the defense didn't force a single punt is a huge factor. I'm not disagreeing that the offense played a role in losing the game (a major role), but to dismiss the defense (as you seem to be) is dishonest. Both sides played a role in that loss. To attribute it to one or the other is just, well, stupid.

The defense didn't force a punt in the first 1/2 because they were busy getting N.O. to TURN THE BALL OVER!!!

How can you complain that they didn't get them to force a punt, when they were doing ONE BETTER!?!?

Did they do anything after that? Hell no, they were gassed and demoralized. The O went three and out repeatedly after that and handed N.O. the game.

June 13th, 2013, 4:58 pm

regularjoe12

Def. Coordinator – Teryl Austin

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 4212Location: Davison Mi

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

wjb21ndtown wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

wjb21ndtown wrote:

2 or three in a row, yes... And we failed to take advantage of 2 or 3 takeaways as well. It was demoralizing to the D and you could see that they were gassed going into 1/2 time. That's what killed the game, period.

NO wasn't "afraid of our O," they just knew that we couldn't stop a 4th and anything short. Why not go for it? You're playing against a gassed defense that can't stop anything.

Seriously man, it's absurd to say only the offense lost that game. The fact that the defense didn't force a single punt is a huge factor. I'm not disagreeing that the offense played a role in losing the game (a major role), but to dismiss the defense (as you seem to be) is dishonest. Both sides played a role in that loss. To attribute it to one or the other is just, well, stupid.

The defense didn't force a punt in the first 1/2 because they were busy getting N.O. to TURN THE BALL OVER!!!

How can you complain that they didn't get them to force a punt, when they were doing ONE BETTER!?!?

Did they do anything after that? Hell no, they were gassed and demoralized. The O went three and out repeatedly after that and handed N.O. the game.

ok ill give you the O did choke a bit in that game...but how is it Staffords fault we ran for a whopping 32 yards all game??

_________________2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion

June 13th, 2013, 5:18 pm

sweetd20

Pro Bowl Player

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 amPosts: 2490

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

That game the Lions started out on fire but then were out coached and out played by better all around talent on both sides of the ball. If I'm not mistaken there were a few key drops in that game and as was mentioned there was no running game. That was also the game Nate was flagged every time he put his hands on the defender. I think the Saints played the the old "keep an eye on him" card. There was one at was clearly a push off but with the others I've seen much worse not called. This past season not only did Stafford lose nearly his entire WR group he also has missed any real receiving threat as a check down since Best was lost. On top of that he faced more pressure up the middle than any other QB thanks to Peterman and Raiola. He has to make the next step but he is in the top ten QBs and is going to get Romo type money because that's what the league says he's worth.

The questions have to be answered to what holes will need to be filled next season and how the incoming QB class will look but as it stands now there should be some quality talent in the 2nd round. I feel Stafford is the future unless he absolutely falls on his face this year but the Lions need to get a better long term #2 and insurance policy and should be able to get that guy next year.

June 13th, 2013, 5:57 pm

The Legend

Team President - Rod Wood

Joined: February 11th, 2005, 3:01 pmPosts: 5021Location: WSU

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

sweetd20 wrote:

That game the Lions started out on fire but then were out coached and out played by better all around talent on both sides of the ball. If I'm not mistaken there were a few key drops in that game and as was mentioned there was no running game. That was also the game Nate was flagged every time he put his hands on the defender. I think the Saints played the the old "keep an eye on him" card. There was one at was clearly a push off but with the others I've seen much worse not called. This past season not only did Stafford lose nearly his entire WR group he also has missed any real receiving threat as a check down since Best was lost. On top of that he faced more pressure up the middle than any other QB thanks to Peterman and Raiola. He has to make the next step but he is in the top ten QBs and is going to get Romo type money because that's what the league says he's worth.

The questions have to be answered to what holes will need to be filled next season and how the incoming QB class will look but as it stands now there should be some quality talent in the 2nd round. I feel Stafford is the future unless he absolutely falls on his face this year but the Lions need to get a better long term #2 and insurance policy and should be able to get that guy next year.

you are mixing components of two difft games. lions played saints in 2nd half of regular season on a sunday night game that year as well as in the playoffs

June 13th, 2013, 11:08 pm

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 10024Location: Dallas

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

BillySims wrote:

kdsberman wrote:

Let Stafford go? Are you kidding me? How come whenever we get a good player, we always talk about either letting him go or trading him?

You let Stafford go, you pretty much lost CJ until our next QB can gel with him, and who knows if that QB has the arm to consistently get it to him deep like Matt can. Sure, Stafford's completion percentage can be a little higher, or his mechanics better, or things like that but I got news guys, players CAN improve you know. We FINALLY have a franchise QB and people want to let him go. Just cant win can we.

I did not say we should let him go. I said we should let him go IF he can't prove that he can win a playoff game. He has two seasons remaining on his current contract to prove he can win a playoff game. If he can't, we cut bait, let him walk, draft a new QB, get massive cap relief, and get a comp pick.

He's still very young and the best QB the Lions have had in 50 years - you guys are nuts.

Im with Pablo. UNless Stafford breaks everything in his body, or plays worse than Sanchez (not really possible based on talent level) he is our QB for a long time, the only difference this season will make is if they dont do the contract before, this season results could have a 2-4 million/yr difference in his yearly pay for the next contact.

June 14th, 2013, 12:26 pm

wjb21ndtown

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

Pablo wrote:

BillySims wrote:

kdsberman wrote:

Let Stafford go? Are you kidding me? How come whenever we get a good player, we always talk about either letting him go or trading him?

You let Stafford go, you pretty much lost CJ until our next QB can gel with him, and who knows if that QB has the arm to consistently get it to him deep like Matt can. Sure, Stafford's completion percentage can be a little higher, or his mechanics better, or things like that but I got news guys, players CAN improve you know. We FINALLY have a franchise QB and people want to let him go. Just cant win can we.

I did not say we should let him go. I said we should let him go IF he can't prove that he can win a playoff game. He has two seasons remaining on his current contract to prove he can win a playoff game. If he can't, we cut bait, let him walk, draft a new QB, get massive cap relief, and get a comp pick.

He's still very young and the best QB the Lions have had in 50 years - you guys are nuts.

You don't pay a guy $18 mill per year just because he's better than our other rejects. Unless his accuracy improves and unless he gets smarter and learns how to pick up the blitz, he's not worth $18... If he can accomplish those two things he's worth it, if not, let him go...

That said, It's stupid to pay him and extend him now. Give him those two years to prove himself. He's locked in. Let him play, let him earn his keep and let him prove his worth. To extend him now is stupid. Tie ourselves to another $140 mill, $50 mill guaranteed just to save $3-4 mill on the salary cap this year? Stupid...

June 14th, 2013, 1:49 pm

Blueskies

QB Coach - Brian Callahan

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pmPosts: 3121

Re: Lions working on Stafford deal, but have a deadline

I think $18/yr would be a bargain. Other teams might be willing $20m+

Either you have a QB and you have a shot, or you have no QB and you have no shot.

Look at all the dumb things teams have done to get a QB in recent years. The Raiders paying a first and second for washed-up Palmer. The Vikings drafting Christian Ponder, etc.

Say the Lions let Stafford go. Then they have three options:

1) Build a legendary defense. Not just a good defense, or a very good defense. A defense to rival the 2000 Ravens.2) Go 2-14 and draft another Stafford3) Trade multiple first round picks for a QB